Minister of the Environment Thorbjørn Berntsen

The Lillehammer Conference

Lillehammer 13. Febr. 1996.

Distinguished Minister, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am happy to participate at this conference and to be given the opportunity to share some of Norway`s "Olympic experiences" on this second anniversary of the Lillehammer Games. This is an exiting moment in the one hundred years old history of the Olympic movement. As we proceed towards the end of the century, sports- and environment organisations as well as olympic organising committees and applicant countries are joining forces to both widen and deepen the scope of the Olympic Charter.

Norwegians are very proud of the Lillehammer Olympics. We played host to spectacular and outstanding athletic performances and the event as such was carried out in a professional and environmentally-sound manner.

Traditionally, large public events have not been environmentally friendly, and environmental groups and green activists have often opposed them. Construction and infrastructure development at and around the sites combined with a drastic increase in population during the event can threaten the natural as well as the cultural environment.

Environmental pressure groups in Norway made their views on the Winter Games known early on, and a number of controversial issues made headline news. Progress was only made as conflict was replaced by cooperation between the parties involved. It was in a sense this "compromise" between environmentalists and authorities that in the end gave substance and credibility to the "green" image of the Lillehammer Games.

We like to think of the Lillehammer Games as a turning point. Special efforts were made to reverse trends and to limit the extent of damages inflicted upon nature. We feel in a sense that we have made an environmental "investment" into the Olympic Movement. The cooperation agreement between IOC and UNEP gives us confidence that our "investment" is in safe hands.

This is also a positive signal that the principle of sustainable development is gradually gaining a foothold in "new" sectors. Norway`s firm committment to environment and development was reconfirmed in connection with Lillehammer by the Parliaments decision to ".....approach the construction work connected with the event in such a way as to highlight Norway`s will and ability to follow the recommendations of the World Commission on Environment and Development".

The real challenge lies in translating good intentions, policy statements and "green" principles into practise. I believe that some of the experiences from the Lillehammer Olympics will be of interest to organsiers of similar events in the future. I hope that the "Lillehammer legacy" will be seen as a constructive contribution to the work that lies ahead.

The following four principles and guidelines formed the cornerstone of Lillehammer`s "green profile" :

Firstly, the Organising Committe established environment as one of the criteria by which the success of the games as a whole would be measured. The Olympic Organizing Committee drew up special policy documents to set specific environmental requirements for energy consumption, waste disposal, procurement and so forth. In front of large-scale development, I believe that environmentally conscious leadership and management is probably the single most important criteria for success.

Secondly, environment was seen as an integral part of all activities rather than as a separate programme in the hands of one sector. Basically this meant that decision-makers in every field could potentially be held responsible for neglect of the environment.

Thirdly, legal requirements as regards regional and land use planning were met in a consistent way. Waivers or exemptions were as far as possible avoided. The development of specific legislation was in this case not necessary. The use of legislation proved to be the public sector`s most powerful "tool". Legislation alone is, however, not always enough. Large-scale events can also require the reinforcement of local, regional and sometimes even national environmental management bodies.

At Lillehammer a number of projects went beyond the given legal requirements and minimum standards. I would in particular like to highlight the efforts that were made to improve the visual environment. The Organising Committee set up an advisory group on environment and architecture that made guidelines for the aesthetics of man-made landscapes. Construction and development in general was encouraged to comply with standards of quality, style and design.

Last, but not least, as briefly stated above, was the organisational infrastructure that was established with participation from the public sector, the Olympic Organizing Commitee and non governmental organisations. The latter were organised in an umbrella organisation called PEFO (The Environment Friendly Olympics). The NGOs were in other words a part of the "official team". The various committees and working groups were to promote innovative environmental solutions and to address environmental challenges and potential sources of conflict upfront before they arose.

The determination to bring the games into a sustainable framework turned Lillehammer into a showcase for the scientific and commercial achievements that are made possible as a result of high environmental standards. The "greening" of the Olympics triggered a number of innovations and ambitious environmental projects. Examples include methods for environmental auditing of buildings and construction projects and the introduction of the concept of "green tourism".

Large events are by nature threatening to the environmental equilibrium in the region concerned. Environmental concerns must therefore become an integral part of all phases and aspects of future events. This includes post-use of the facilities (of which this conference is a splendid example).

Lillehammer has proved that the "green" factor does not have to stand in the way of regional development and business opportunities. On the contrary, with challenges come possibilitites. As far as "costs" are concerned, it would certainly have been more costly in the long run had we not acted with precaution. At the basis of our approach to environmental issues is the notion that it is cheaper to prevent than to repair.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
We welcome the IOC`s decision to use its unique position and exposure within the world of sport to draw attention to environmental concerns. Public awareness can be an efficient tool for reform.

Many spectator sports take place in nature and contribute to installing in people an appreciation of what the outdoors has to offer. Environment is also about health and the quality of life. In Norway, we even had a "get into shape for the Olympics" movement in the years prior to the event. The population in Norway was further mobilised by a torch relay (a symbolic olympic flame) that travelled the whole country, including Svalbard. These events served to promote mass participation and involvement in the Olympic project.

Sports have in other cases been used succesfully as an instrument of peace, for instance in the case of the Mathara Youth Sports Association in Nairobi. Competitions can bring together people of different class, race and religion. Adherence to rules and a common code of ethics, fair play and mutual respect on the tracks and fields can allow even enemies to compete as equals. Sport knows no frontiers, and has the potential to unite people towards a common cause or goal.

The IOC is also in a position to motivate governments and organisations. The power to award Olympic Games gives the IOC a fair amount of "leverage" that is now being used to set environmental criterias and minimum standards. Bidding cities must now answer to and comply with a series of requirements. I understand that the IOC is in the process of supplementing bidding requirements with futher environmental guidelines. To ensure compliance, implementation reports ought to be reviewed in some form of international environmental audit.

Organisers of Olympic games are from now on encouraged to set an example of how large-scale events best can be managed. In order to achieve new Olympic environmental standards, the national legal requirements should preferably be regarded as minimum standards only. The size and prestige of Olympic games means that there is scope for a considerable amount of positive "multiplier effects" and spin-offs in terms of infrastructure and know-how should a host city succeed in improving its environmental record.

We welcome the establishment of a strategic partnership between the IOC and UNEP. UNEP`s competence on environmental issues will most certainly be an asset to the Olympic movement. UNEP also represents and stands for the global approach and the important north-south dimension.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
Development and construction must be carried out within the limits of nature`s carrying capacity. A conscious approach involving planning, research and development with all the parties involved will minimize damages and make large events a showcase for creativity and alternative solutions.

We hope that this conference will be seen as an important stepping-stone in the process that we have embarked upon, and that the information and insight that we have gained from each other will be put to good use in future events.

---

Lagt inn 14 februar 1996 av Statens forvaltningstjeneste, ODIN-redaksjonen